Mike's Dealmaker List

SlyFlourish

SlyFlourish.com
Supporter
I was reading some other threads here and thought I'd outline why I decided to switch to fourth edition:

1. Simplified DMing. It will be so nice to not have to rewrite monsters to get them into a playable mode.

2. Reduced monster stat blocks. Tied to #1 but having simplified monster stat blocks will make running them at the table a lot easier.

3. Attacks vs. Defenses. I much prefer having attacks vs. set defense scores. It never made sense that a guy hitting with a sword got a + attack but a spellcaster had to hope the victim failed a saving throw (basically a reverse attack roll). The new way makes a lot more sense based on the "roll the die, add a modifier, match against a static number" core rule.

4. Diagonals = 1. This has been a house rule of mine for a while now and it's a lot easier to manage.

5. Threatened squares = adjacent squares. No more polearm wielding players who get 45 attacks of opportunity against anything that moves on the map.

6. Charge is easier. Can you see it? You can charge it.

7. Action points. They're like a little bit of indiana jones packed into your character.

8. Simplified yet powerful player characters. This is huge for me. I can't stand 3e clerics or wizards. The amount of paperwork and book flipping is maddening. Powers is a much more straight forward system.

9. Everyone has a little cleric in them. Healing surges is a good way to spread the most boring aspect of a single class out to each class equally. I've done this in my weekly campaign, a healer-less campaign, for weeks now using only health potions and some nifty swift-action potion ingester bracers.

10. No more iterative attacks. Nothing drove a game down than a hastened two-weapon-wielding level 16 fighter and his forty eight attacks all for different attack scores. Who wants to watch Bob do a whole lot of basic math!

There's tons more but that's a good start. I can't wait for June.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are definitely some things I don't like about 4e, although some of them may be because I don't know the full story, but I am also definitely switching to 4e for many of the same reasons mshea has just listed.

I can understand why some people don't want to switch to 4e and I respect them for making that decision.

However, I am switching primarily because 4e is going in a direction that I had already started to take 3.5. Many of my house rules are now being made core rules and many of the things that I would have liked to do (but either didn't know how to do or didn't have time to implement or balance) are also being worked into the core rules. This makes me very happy.

There are other more superficial changes to the game that I like as well, like the return of contextual evocative landscape art and good layout design in the books. There are also other little things like the fact that my last 3.5 campaign world had no high elves, only wood/wild elves, and now 4e is making all "elves" be wood/wild elves while high elves get a new name and their own plane of existence separate from the material world. I like that. It means I won't have to change much if I decide to keep using my campaign world. I also like that divine magic is now referred to as prayers. That's something I thought would've been good all along.

Those are just a few examples.

Cheers,
Jonathan
 
Last edited:

I'll add one, Mike.

Keep on the Shadowfell. Having read it cover-to-cover now (I'm running early games for my FLGS) I just couldn't be more impressed. (Well I'd be more impressed if I was reading the core books before June 6th, heh.)

My point is that ultimately proof is in the pudding, and we've been waiting for some pudding for awhile now. And man does this pudding taste good. I just need the recipe now. I'm going to run Keep on the Shadowfell for the shop this weekend, and I don't think I've ever been this excited to DM a game.

As a matter of fact, I'll change my main "dealmaker" to that:

I've never been this excited to DM.
 

i´m also switching and counting the days till release....
when me and a pal first saw the some tidbits , mainly the ddxp chars and the monsters and more doc , we were excited...
and with each coming preview and all those creative , calculating and inventive people here , it´s never been so much fun playing and dmíng d&d with this preview material...
thanks to all of you who collected the bits and parts and made a pdf out of it...
i´ve never seen my players so excited about a game since a deadlands tpk..
so i bow to all who made monsters , pre-release rules compilations and all sorts of such stuff...
i owe you the probably best couple of weeks in years
 

Although I don't yet know if I will be switching or not (the PCs in my homebrew are level 6 (about to enter the Necromancer's Spike) and still going strong) I have preordered the 3 core books for the following reasons.

1. I startd playing 1E way back in the day and despite my apprehensions about each new edition that followed (especially 3.5) I still ended up switching upon reading the core books through.

2. Having included some of the 4e precursors (like Bo9S elements and reserve feats) into the current game they have generally been well recieved.

3. Having played and enjoyed SWSE I hope 4E will be similarly enjoyable.

4. About half of our groups players seem excited about 4E so I am sure at least one of them will end up running a game.

5. The stated design goal of reducing DM preperation is a positive for me.

6. The possibility of a well done GH release would almost certainly convince me to run a 4E game.

7. I will never find out if the game is really any good or not with buying and reading it and $62.00 isn't going to kill me to find out.

The way I see it people who have playtested it have heaped so much love on it, even if it sucks it's just got to have a few redeeming qualities/ideas I can use to make my 3.5 games better.

But yes until I have the books in my hand and have read them cover to cover I will remain a $E skeptic.
 


4e is simply more aligned with my personal tastes than 3e ever was.

I don't care about emulating reality, verisimimisimilitude, historical accuracy or any of the crap that mattered so much to me when I was a 14-year old nerd larva.

I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal.
 

Preface: When 4E was announced, I was skeptical; It seemed too soon, and I rather enjoyed 3E. I pretty much knew the system backwards and forwards, so when they started talking about all these huge, sweeping changes, it really seemed like I would stay with 3E. However, the more I see, the more I like.
My Dealmakers:

1. Less DM Paperwork. - Things seem to be easier to do in 4E. Need a Firebreathing orc for whatever reason? Bam! Done. I like to do my work 'by the book' so anything that involves less book work and more time getting back to creative work is a plus in my book.

2. Cinematic Design. - Action points, to me, are like the part of the movie where the camera focuses on your character, your theme music plays, you spout some sort of taunt or declaration to win, and then do something amazing. Trying to get that kind of effect in 3E requires you to actively look for it, or arrange it manually. With 4E, it just happens.

3. Artwork. - Some of the 4E artwork is down right awesome. I really liked the quality levels of the more recent WotC 3E Book artwork, and this stuff is just as good.

4. It looks fun to play. - 3E encouraged some play styles that bored the heck out of me. 4E is more active, and interesting, an the game looks rather balanced between the classes for once. Some people claim its too much like an MMORPG, but I disagree; 3E was more like an MMO, with its fighters standing there making full attacks every round. It was like Auto-Attack from EQ all over again. If they did draw inspiration from MMOs, it seems like they took all the fun stuff (get cool powers, interesting encounters usually found at later levels) and removed all the boring stuff. (level grinding, monotonously using the same tactics over, and over, because they work, etc)

True, I'll miss 3E, and all the 3E books on my shelf will gather dust, but 4E is, for me, a flat-out better game. I've already preordered the box-set on Amazon, and I'll likely have it the day it comes out. (or shortly therafter)
 

I'm an utter f4nboi. I still feel the need to kibbitz.
mshea said:
I was reading some other threads here and thought I'd outline why I decided to switch to fourth edition:

1. Simplified DMing. It will be so nice to not have to rewrite monsters to get them into a playable mode.

2. Reduced monster stat blocks. Tied to #1 but having simplified monster stat blocks will make running them at the table a lot easier.
Amen.
mshea said:
3. Attacks vs. Defenses. I much prefer having attacks vs. set defense scores. It never made sense that a guy hitting with a sword got a + attack but a spellcaster had to hope the victim failed a saving throw (basically a reverse attack roll). The new way makes a lot more sense based on the "roll the die, add a modifier, match against a static number" core rule.
I actually wish that it had gone the other way. I'm glad they've consolidated, so that AC works the same way that reflex does, for instance -- but there was a lot of good stuff to be said for "Roll a reflex save or fall in the pit trap". Is that now an initiative check, or what? I'd have rather seen everything become a die roll, though that'd take twice as long, so I understand why it wasn't done.
mshea said:
4. Diagonals = 1. This has been a house rule of mine for a while now and it's a lot easier to manage.

5. Threatened squares = adjacent squares. No more polearm wielding players who get 45 attacks of opportunity against anything that moves on the map.
I really dislike this, but I understand why it was done :)
mshea said:
6. Charge is easier. Can you see it? You can charge it.

7. Action points. They're like a little bit of indiana jones packed into your character.

8. Simplified yet powerful player characters. This is huge for me. I can't stand 3e clerics or wizards. The amount of paperwork and book flipping is maddening. Powers is a much more straight forward system.
Amen.
mshea said:
9. Everyone has a little cleric in them. Healing surges is a good way to spread the most boring aspect of a single class out to each class equally. I've done this in my weekly campaign, a healer-less campaign, for weeks now using only health potions and some nifty swift-action potion ingester bracers.

10. No more iterative attacks. Nothing drove a game down than a hastened two-weapon-wielding level 16 fighter and his forty eight attacks all for different attack scores. Who wants to watch Bob do a whole lot of basic math!

There's tons more but that's a good start. I can't wait for June.
Ditto :)
 

Jack99 said:

OT...

I always wanted to know, when quoting someone, what is the purpose of quoting them and then just using the word "This" afterwards? Is that supposed to mean something? I see it all the time, and not sure why it is used...

I take it to mean that it is something you agree with, but then, why not just say "I agree" or /agree?
 

Remove ads

Top